If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

OptiBoard has an opportunity for a new main sponsor beginning immediately.
Started in 1995, OptiBoard has grown into the largest online site for eyecare professionals in the world. If you have an interest in becoming an OptiBoard sponsor, please let me know. Thanks, Steve
P.S. I have already turned down an online retailer as a sponsor. It would be nice if the eyecare industry would support OptiBoard as much as much as OptiBoard supports them.

In order of preference, from a lab point of view: Trivex, 1.67 (MR-10), 1.74 (HR-74 (Seiko))..... and that's it. Trivex is the best material for drills, and if it's not the best material for your patient's Rx, then it probably shouldn't be put in a drill mount. A/R is a must as well, and with that Rx, I would NOT high luster polish the edges either.

I'm sure someone will also mention Hi-Vex/Tribrid, which should also be great.

There are rules. Knowing those are easy. There are exceptions to the rules. Knowing those are easy. Knowing when to use them is slightly less easy. There are exceptions to the exceptions. Knowing those is a little more tricky, and know when to use those is even more so. Our industry is FULL of all of the above.

As I recall 1.74 index really isn't very good for drill mounts because of the brittleness of the materials. Although with that correction (-7.25 - 4.25 X 96) it's not going to look very nice in any rimless

Yes. Seiko developed their own proprietary 1.74 material (HR-174). I don't know about Optima, but I know that Shamir, Shore, and Essilor use a MR-174 resin. According to Seiko, their material is more thermally stable, and better for drill mounts.

As far as 1.74 being to brittle for drill mounts, I've got three pairs of the Seiko 1.74 lenses in drill mounts and none have cracked, chipped, or split around the drill holes.

There are rules. Knowing those are easy. There are exceptions to the rules. Knowing those are easy. Knowing when to use them is slightly less easy. There are exceptions to the exceptions. Knowing those is a little more tricky, and know when to use those is even more so. Our industry is FULL of all of the above.

I'll chime in for 1.70 index. Way better ABBE than anything mentioned except Trivex.And you can just drill the lenses deep enough to hold the plugs and not even disturb the back surface. 1.70 is pretty tough stuff and it drills nicely.

DragonlensmanWV N.A.O.L.
"There is nothing patriotic about hating your government or pretending you can hate your government but love your country."

Wow, daring Rx for a drill mount. Hope they don't mind showing a little edge. I think Trivex would be a little to thick in this instance, I would probably use 1.67 if I had to make them, but hear good things about 1.74 Seiko, haven't used it though.

The real questions are..... What is your A Measurement? and What type of 3 Piece frame are you using?

Silhouette Frame have worked well for me with Hyper Myopic RX's. Their drill posts are just over 3mm in length and their bushings are almost 7mm in length. I have had a patient with a -9.00 in a 48 A, then lens cam out to be 6mm Thick on the edge. You have to think your edge thickness as well as material. You just need to spend a few moments calculating your edge thickness. One of my OD's is a -8.50 and I spent the time custom making the size to make the edge thickness as thin as possible, and her -8.50's are 3.63 mm thin.

Your OD Lens:
In 1.74 with an A of 48mm your edge thickness should be around 5.58mm thick
In 1.64 with an A of 48mm your edge thickness should be around 6.26mm thick
You OS Lens:
In 1.74 with an A of 48mm your edge thickness should be around 5.68mm thick
In 1.64 with an A of 48mm your edge thickness should be around 6.14mm thick

With a 1.0 CT you may cut another 0.30mm from the edge thickness.

Your thickest point on OU is going to be Temporal and Nasal inferior on the lenses

Your difference in edge thickness is only 0.68 mm OD and 0.46 mm OS, which to the patient means nothing. You can sell them the 1.74 at a higher cost, but they will not be happy that it does not look any thinner then any other pair of glasses.

My suggestion is to spend the time with your frame and the patient, make a custom size and shape, calculate you sizes and thicknesses and then verify with your lab. Yes it's a lot of work on the front end, but it will keep you from having to remake or having an unhappy patient with their selection.

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.~ Mark Twain ~